User talk:WikiKingOfMishawaka/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, WikiKingOfMishawaka! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! kevMAC (talk) 10:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

No, never got a reply. I still can't figure out whats wrong with it. --SamB135 (talk) 20:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Consensus

This policy is what you're looking for, but I do think that consensus can change whenever the community sees fit, be that in a year, a month, or even a week. If the community feels that such statements should be in the article and clear consensus was made, usually you can point them towards the discussion made previous to the change. I think each case would be different as you say, especially in Balkan articles and other touchy subjects. Thanks for asking, and I hope this answers your question. If not, feel free to ping me again! weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 06:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Recreational fishing

Hi WikiKingOfMishawaka. It's dead easy to hammer the endless articles that need improvement in Wikipedia. The real hard challenge is to put yourself on the line and have a go at improving them yourself. Looking through your edits, I see you hammering everyone else, and not making one SINGLE constructive edit of your own. I challenge you to be a little more humble, and see if you are able to OFFER some improvements yourself. If you think recreational fishing needs more improvement (which it does, as nearly every article in Wikipedia does), then what might YOU offer? --Geronimo20 (talk) 13:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

My contributions are in no way, shape, or form relevant to the fact that the article is poorly written, biased, and poorly referenced. Stop violating WP:OWN. WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 13:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I do not see your discussion on the talk page, explaining why you consider this article to be POV. Please direct me to where I can find your concerns. --Geronimo20 (talk) 13:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Stop removing the refimprove tag, first and foremost, as there are a multitude of CN tags present in the article, meaning additional references are needed. Second, read the history of the page. I noted my concern when tagging it as POV. Thirdly, I'm done discussing this on my talk page, as you've denigrated to petty edit-warring. Any further removal of tags on the article will be brought to an administrator's attention. WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 13:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

You just added all those endless need citations yourself. Nasty stuff. --Geronimo20 (talk) 14:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Uhhhh, are you aware how Wikipedia works? Those are statements that need direct citations. You don't just add a sentence and hope everyone takes it as gospel. And 'well I fish so I know that as fact' ain't gonna hold up too well. Glad I could help educate you on the process. WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 14:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Being given to understand that my edits to "The Terminator" caused vandalism is biased to the backbone. Nevertheless, if you experience this, kindly help me educate about the fertile productivity of the reiterated edits hoisted by you now or else expound how my edits demonstrate vandalism and yours not? Awaiting your reply! (User:Vikaszt) —Preceding comment was added at 08:05, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Oldprodfull

Hello, WikiKingOfMishawaka ...

When you contest a PROD, as you did with

• Dark Tower (1987 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

... please add or update an {{Oldprodfull}} template on the article's Talk page ... and as a courtesy, maybe a {{Deprod}} on the Talk page of the editor who initiated the PROD (that's where {{Oldprodfull}} comes in handy; for identifying them. :-)

Happy Editing! — 151.200.237.53 (talk · contribs) _{22:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)}

Edit warring on UI and UW pages

Judging by the edit history on both pages, either you are doing revenge edits on the IP, or vice-versa. Regardless, you should knock it off. If you guys want to fight it out about which school is better, do it on the talk pages. Keep the petty edit warring out of the school pages. Tool2Die4 (talk) 13:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I have short tolerance for homers on Wikipedia, and even less patience for the rampant chest-thrusting that takes place on almost all the university articles. I think the point's been made though. WikiKingOfMishawaka (talk) 14:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1